Economic theory and central banks

My daughter Diana has just started A level economics, so we’ve been discussing some of the principles of ‘supply and demand’, and as part of the luggage of economic theory, there’s the premise that a market participant can’t seek to set both the price and the quantity of an economic variable unless as a supplier they have a near monopoly position, or as a buyer they have a monopsony position.

With this in mind, we could argue that over recent months, that the supply of money within the global real economy has operated as if there’s a monopoly, with central banks able both to influence nominal price through their usual management of short term interest rates and to set the quantity of money in the system through their asset purchases, with this reality reflecting the near absence of money creation by commercial banks. Indeed over recent weeks the problem seems to have become worse, with US commercial banks shrinking their credit books, principally by shrinking their trading books and amount of repo lending in response to regulatory changes, but also by continuing to contract their mortgage books and more recently by reducing their level of lending to the commercial sector as well. These actions have reduced the level of liquidity within the US economy – and we may suspect in the global economy also.

However, this has not (until last week at least) resulted in a decline in overall liquidity growth within the economy because large asset purchases by the Federal Reserve and others have been able to more than offset the contractionary influence that has been emerging from the commercial banks.

Whilst the Fed has become the setter of both the price and the quantity of money and credit in the US system, if it does now begin to taper bond purchases, as seems likely, it will explicitly be creating less liquidity outside the banking system, and thereby exerting less direct control over the quantity of money in the economy – although we may well expect that it will continue to create plenty of new liquidity within the banking system.

It has been suggested in some research notes and commentaries that tapering does not represent true monetary tightening since the Fed will still be setting – and potentially even reducing – rates at the front end of the yield curve. However, if this were true, it would then beg the question as to why tapering is contemplated in the first place if it is not going to change anything – and tapering does imply that the Fed will be reducing or letting go of control of the quantity of money in the system and shifting back to focusing on short-term price setting. This represents a major shift in the Fed’s stance and modus operandi.

Ordinarily, if any system receives less supply of something relative to the demand for that ‘commodity’, the price of the commodity in question will tend to rise and this is of course what has been happening in the bond markets over recent months. Markets are simply re-pricing US dollar liquidity because the supply of this liquidity is coming down. Although, the Fed is of course still capable of controlling short term nominal interest rates (and may even attempt to enhance control with a possible new form of reverse repo facility), as the Fed begins to reduce its impact on the quantity of money in the system, so markets regain control of nominal prices of longer term interest rates within the US, along with the external value of the dollar and of course the price and availability of dollar liquidity to foreign borrowers such as Emerging Markets (EMs). It is in these areas that the ‘price of dollars’ has of course increased of late.

Moreover whilst the Fed may be able to control nominal short-term interest rates in the US, it cannot control real interest rates, and if EM currencies continue to weaken and world trade prices continue to fall in response to any Fed tapering, then inflation rates will likely drop and hence even real short-term interest rates could rise regardless of the Fed’s wishes.

The other critical issue that we need to watch is what now happens with the commercial banks because in the real economy, where people want to borrow mortgages and consumer credit, companies want to borrow commercial loans or issue corporate debt instruments, and most may want to hold deposits, the quantity of these variables is set rarely by the size of the monetary base but rather by the attitudes and practices of the commercial banks. The net result is that central banks are important but by no means the only determinant as to what lies ahead.

James Bevan is chief investment officer of CCLA, specialist fund manager for charities and the public sector. CCLA launched The Public Sector Deposit Fund in 2011 to meet the needs of local authorities and other public sector organisations. You can follow James on twitter @jamesbevan_ccla

Guy Ware: The business rates retention row of ducks: Business rates retention is delayed but is this an opportunity to put the funding of local services on a sustainable footing for the foreseeable future? Only if four key questions[...] dlvr.it/QKjLkG#localgovpic.twitter.com/C2xCNViBFE

Quartet of councils lined up for Municipal Bond Agency’s first issue: Four councils are poised to be involved in the The UK Municipal Bonds Agency’s debut bond issue after Moody’s gave the agency an Aa3 credit rating. Moody’s said the… dlvr.it/QKCqdp#localgov

NAO calls on Whitehall to confront long-term funding of local government: The government’s fragmented approach to oversight of council finances, and the absence of a long-term funding plan are increasing risks to statutory services, according… dlvr.it/QKBQfR#localgovpic.twitter.com/5otTR1wPa5

LPP kicks off first fixed income fund: Local Government Pension Scheme pool, Local Pensions Partnership, has launched its first fixed income fund. The £320m fund is aimed at delivering long-term risk-adjusted returns on global fixed income… dlvr.it/QK3lSM#localgov

Countdown to LATIF North treasury conference in Manchester: There are just over two weeks to go before Room151’s inaugural treasury conference for the north of England chaired by Manchester City Council’s Tim Seagrave and featuring insight from… dlvr.it/QJy2lV#localgov

100% business rates retention could create inequalities: The government’s plan to allow councils to retain 100% of business rates income could encourage greater inequality between councils without promoting growth, according to a new report… dlvr.it/QJJR6v#localgovpic.twitter.com/yiEkObFvel

Leeds offers business loans through peer-to-peer platform: Leeds City Council is to use a peer-to-peer lending platform to lend money to local businesses. The authority has decided to use the rebuildingsociety.com platform — based in the[...] dlvr.it/QJJDWz#localgov

Northamptonshire palns for £10m in cuts a week after ‘unlawful’ budget: Northamptonshire County Council has approved a revised budget for 2018-19, a week after its auditors warned that its original plans were potentially unlawful. The authority… dlvr.it/QJGQy2#localgov

Carillion collapse causes £5m loss to LGPS funds: Three Local Government Pension Scheme funds have lost up to £5m as a result of direct investments with Carillion, according to an assessment of the impact of the company’s liquidation.[...] dlvr.it/QJGHXq#localgov

Helen Randall: Court ruling over Haringey’s development vehicle offers clarity to councils: Politics killed the controversial Haringey Development Vehicle but a challenge through the courts failed. Helen Randall explains what the ruling means… dlvr.it/QHsBk0#localgovpic.twitter.com/JgYrPCH8E4

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website.OK